March 1st, 2010
07:00 PM ET

Is hiding debt the same as cheating?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Hiding debt could hurt a relationship more than adultery.

It's no secret that Americans are swimming in credit card debt - but a piece on CNNMoney.com describes how some husbands, wives and even children try to keep the debt a secret from their loved ones.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/03/01/art.credit.jpg caption=""]
One expert says hidden debt is "a form of cheating so subtle you don't even know you're doing it."

The problem is when one half of a couple tries to hide debt, it's impossible to keep it hidden forever. This article describes one case where a Dallas woman started racking up thousands of dollars in debt behind her husband's back.

She opened up a credit card and started shopping to relieve stress - planning to pay it off each month. Well, that didn't happen... And her husband found out her secret when he checked the family's credit report; he says it was a slap in the face.

In other cases - one spouse might rack up credit card debt in order to get a small business off the ground... only to be discovered when the family goes to take out a loan, etc.

And, it's not just spouses who lie about money. Children sometimes do it too. This piece talks about a son who got interested in the stock market as a kid, and wound up losing $250,000 day trading - a lot of it was his mother's money.

Money is always a sensitive issue... and it's certainly ended more than a few relationships.

Here’s my question to you: Is hiding debt the same as cheating?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?


Filed under: Uncategorized
March 1st, 2010
06:00 PM ET

Too much 'Chicago' in the White House?


The Chicago skyline along Lake Michigan. (PHOTO CREDIT: JEFF HAYNES/AFP/Getty Images)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

President Obama needs to go "Chicago-style" on health care if he wants to get his signature legislation through Congress.

Al Hunt writes for Bloomberg News that the president hasn't been tough enough in pushing for the things he wants:

"That's not the Obama style; he tends to be patient, persistent, sometimes charming; although from Chicago, he doesn't practice the arm-twisting politics the city is known for."

Hunt goes on to say that when it comes to health care reform, time is not on the president's side. Actually - he's only got a few weeks - since the bill needs to pass before Congress goes on spring break at the end of the month.

And, Hunt writes that Mr. Obama will need to use "forceful persuasion" in order to get wavering Democrats in the House and Senate on board. Meanwhile this call for the president to use more "Chicago-style" tactics comes as critics charge the White House is loaded with too many Chicago insiders.

Almost all of the president's inner circle hails from Chicago - including chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, top advisers David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett, and of course, First Lady Michelle Obama.

Some blame the paralysis in Washington now on the so-called Chicago mafia, saying they don't have enough experience to govern at the executive branch level. And that they're not listening to what the American people want.

In particular, many fingers are pointed at Emanuel, known as "Rahmbo" - saying he's gone too far with his abrasive manner and cursing.

Here’s my question to you: Is there too much "Chicago" in the White House?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?


Filed under: President Barack Obama • White House
March 1st, 2010
05:00 PM ET

Why does House Speaker Pelosi still defend Rep. Rangel?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says Congressman Charlie Rangel's actions don't pass the "smell test"... yet she refuses to force him out as chairman of the powerful ways and means committee.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/03/01/art.rangel.pelosi.jpg caption="Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi."]
However the pressure is mounting. Some Democrats are now joining with Republicans in calling for the New York congressman to be removed. The New York Times says the "arrogance" Rangel showed after the ethics committee ruling gives one more reason for Pelosi to "stop protecting him."

Pelosi acknowledges that "what Mr. Rangel has been admonished for is not good"... but that he didn't "jeopardize our country in any way." Pelosi says she's waiting for the ethics committee to finish its investigation before she makes any decisions.

This is the same Nancy Pelosi who vowed to "drain the swamp" in Washington when she became speaker; and the same Nancy Pelosi who years ago called on Republicans to remove the "ethically unfit" Tom Delay as their majority leader.

The ethics committee admonished Rangel for taking two corporate-sponsored trips to the Caribbean. And there's a laundry list of other issues they're investigating that involve Rangel's personal finances - like not reporting hundreds of thousands of dollars on income and assets... They're also looking into Rangel's fundraising efforts, his use of several, rent-stabilized Harlem apartments, and his failure to pay taxes on a vacation home in the Dominican Republic.

Here’s my question to you: Why does House Speaker Nancy Pelosi continue to defend Rep. Charlie Rangel?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?